Bibliographic record
Abstract
Folk law has been playing an Important role In Chinese thousands of years history and culture.In the process of the rule of law in China,China pays too much attention to western legal culture rather than China's national conditions,which resluts in the fact that it is difficult for state law to go to the countryside and folk law can not play its due role in building the rule of law effectively. This paper analyzes why state law system in rural areas is difficult to be carried out in-depth from theory aspect and practical aspect.And then proposes approaches of integration for state law and folk law,so as to better facilitate the process of the rule of law. Key words: Folk Law; Rural Society; State Law Resume: Le droit populaire a joue un role important dans l'histoire et la culture chinoises. Dans le processus de la construction du regne de la loi en Chine, la Chine accorde trop d'attention a la culture juridique occidentale plutot qu'aux conditions nationales de la Chine, ce qui reslute dans le fait qu'il est difficile d'appliquer le droit de l'Etat a la campagne et que le droit populaire ne peut pas jouer son role dans la construction d'un regne de droit efficace. Cet article analyse pourquoi le systeme de loi de l'Etat dans les zones rurales est difficile a etre realise en profondeur a partir des aspects theoriques et pratiques. Il propose ensuite des approches de l'integration pour le droit de l'etat et le droit populaire, afin de mieux faciliter le processus de l’elaboration du regne de la loi. Mots-cles: Droit Populaire; Societe Rurale; Droit De L'etat
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".